Monday, 15 July 2013

Exeter Exeposé Sucks...

Exeter ExeposéIssue 606

Sex-on-the-Exe: are blowjobs really that hard to swallow?

By "Anonymous"

I responded to this piece some time ago but the editors chose to censor the opinions of any critics to their very own self-styled, narcissistic little Carrie Bradshaw columnist. So here is my response in full...

Whilst an interesting piece I couldn't help but note the glaring contradiction contained within
the "Anonymous" article on 'blowjobs'. Overlooking the fact that a
self-confessed "ardent feminist" chose to disregard International
Women's Day, preferring to use the week in which it fell to instead
promote the somewhat dubious and puerile 'Steak & Blowjob Day', I
have to take the article to task.

The
author proudly declares, from behind the curtain of anonymity, her love
of blowjobs, her sexually submissive nature and her desire to
be dominated by men, before proceeding to immediately back-peddle,
stating the act of giving head is actually far from being submissive but
rather is 'empowering'.

Whilst of course it is true the art of fellatio per se
is not a submissive act, for example when performed as part of the
ubiquitous '69', or if you have your man blindfolded and chained to the
bed, the author does not refer to such encounters, so it is baffling why
she seeks to cloak her sexuality with a perhaps well-meaning but
somewhat half-hearted justification. Although not necessarily debasing, a
blowjob is, outside of a loving and stable relationship, generally a
submissive act of phallocentric oral worship of the dominant and
masculine, the above examples aside. Indeed the more extreme and
denigrating forms of blowjob such as the opprobrious 'bumkin' (if you
have to ask I doubt this unique kink is for you, although Urban Dictionary does provide a satisfactory if perfunctory explanation) are
nothing more then debasing. Whilst a submissive may find a servile and
degrading position on their knees in a toilet cubicle an aphrodisiac,
and perhaps even liberating, in could never be described as 'empowering'

However,
I think the salient point to be picked from this article is the
reported reaction of her fellow "feminists" to her open admission
surrounding her sexual proclivities. The objective of feminism has
surely been primarily the fight for equality in all areas of society,
including sexuality. A woman can be whatever she wishes; an Amazonian
warrior, a prim school ma'am or a sensual submissive. Feminism should be
liberating a woman in the bedroom, not monitoring or judging her.

Whilst
the article clearly had it's tongue firmly in cheek (pun intended) I
can't help feel it was a missed opportunity by the author to celebrate
her individual sexuality, rejecting any shame and embarrassment others
seek to project and embracing the incredible, multi-facet intricacies of
human nature that are still, to this day, are so readily oppressed by
society. Falling into the time worn trap of trying to justify who she is
by assuring us that isn't who she is, combined with her desire
for anonymity makes me wonder if it really is 80 years since Anaïs Nin first put her work, and name, above the parapet of societal understanding of human sexuality.

The wise and erudite Susan Sontag once cautioned:

"Fear of sexuality is the new, disease-sponsored register of the universe of fear in which everyone now lives."

No content on this blog constitutes legal advice; if you need direct advice on your legal rights or responsibilities, please consult your own attorney. This blog represents only my own opinions and not those of my cat.